Originally Posted by tikva18
The downfall in this was that the translators did not go back to the original Hebrew when they then proceeded to translate into Latin. Again, the translation went on going from Latin to French; from French to German, and lastly German to English.
Heh? Which translation was this? I have never heard of this before.
[ETA: OK, I did some more mouse hunting and found that there are several Old English, Middle English translations that were based in the Vulgate. Although, these are obviously not translations relied upon by Modern Christians, nor were they ever in great circulation. For the most part, these translations would not be readable, or at least not easily understandable, to modern English speakers.
I still can't find anything though about translating to French or German and then into English though.]
I understand that reading the original Hebrew is the number one option. But, I know that in my Bible (New International Version) the text is translated directly from the Hebrew. (The NT is translated directly from Aramaic & Greek) There is no intermediary Latin, French, German, etc.
The primary source text is the Masoretic Text "as published in the latest editions of the Biblia Hebraicia
" My understanding is that this text is the Tenach accepted by Judaism.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic
There were a number of other sources consulted such as the Samaritan Pentateuch, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.
Most Christian Bibles have a long introduction explaining which sources were used and who did the translating. Even the King James Version of 1611, used the Masoretic text and did not rely upon translating from the Latin (Vulgate) And certainly it didn't go into French or German first.